DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 24 and 28-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In claim 24, on line 1, “the first mounting structure” is indefinite since it lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 28, on line 9, recites “an interface” and claim 29, on lines 1-2, recites “an interface” is indefinite since it is unclear if this structurally limitation is the same or different from one another? Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 21-22, 24, 25, 27-28, 35-36 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Postolek (WO 2022/159364). Postolek discloses a helmet system including a helmet (20) having an inner surface facing an interior of the helmet and an outer surface opposing the inner surface with a first accessory attachment hub/night vision goggles (10) removably attached to the outer surface of the helmet by at least one fastener/receiver/single fastener (22) as shown in figure 1. Further, a second accessory attachment hub/visor (10) configured to be removably attached to the outer surface of the helmet by the at least one fastener/receiver/single fastener (22), page 4, lines 5-26 and as shown in figure 2A. Also, the second accessory attachment hub/visor as shown in figure 2A has a different configuration from the first accessory attachment hub/night vison goggles as shown in figure 1,wherein the first accessory attachment hub is removable from the outer surface of the helmet by removing the at least one fastener and the second accessory attachment hub is attachable to the outer surface of
the helmet by the at least one fastener/receiver (22). The first accessory attachment hub includes
an interface with an interference fit for attaching the visor, page 6, lines 9-14 and the second
accessory attachment hub does not include an interface but a snap-fit or other type of
engagement for removably attaching to the helmet system, page 6, lines 15-18. Additionally,
the first accessory attachment hub and the second attachment hub are configured to attach an
accessory device that is disposed across a front of the helmet (22) when attached thereto as
shown in figures 1 and 2A. However, Postolek does not show the second accessory attachment
hub attached to the at least one fastener in place of the first accessory attachment hub.
Page 4, lines 17-18 of Postolek discloses the at least one fastener/receiver being capable of being used as a repeater by repeating the ability to connect with an accessory.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the at least one fastener of Postolek is capable of connecting but not limited to the second attachment hub/visor being attached in place of the first accessory attachment hub or other structure for shielding the eyes in a cost effective manner.
Claims 24, 26, 34 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Postolek as applied to claims 25, 28 and 35 above, and further in view O’Connell (WO 2018, 169984). Postolek discloses the helmet system with having a first mounting structure with a rail disposed on a side of the helmet and the second accessory attachment hub having an interface for attaching a mandible guard.
O’Connell discloses a helmet system with having a first mounting structure with a rail (28) disposed on a side of the helmet and an accessory attachment hub having at least one interface (36) for attaching a mandible guard via prongs/connector (72) with a lock feature (76) moveable between engaged and disengage positions, subparagraphs 38-39 and as shown in figures 3-4 and 7.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the helmet system of Postolek can be provided with a first mounting structure with a rail disposed on a side of the helmet and the second accessory attachment hub having an interface for attaching a mandible guard as taught by O’Connell in order to protect the cheek bones if desired when the helmet is worn.
With regard to claim 34, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the helmet system of Postolek in view of O’Connell
with a lock feature of the connector will substantially release the lock onto the at least one interface between engaged and disengage positions when the device is worn.
Claim 31 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Postolek as applied to claims 28 and 35 above, and further in view of Giroux (WO 2015/001428). Postolek discloses the invention as set forth above except for having a spacer having a contour matching the outer surface of the helmet is disposed between the first accessory attachment hub or the second accessory attachment hub and the outer surface of the helmet, respectively and the spacer and the first accessory attachment hub are attached to the helmet by the single fastener
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 23 is allowable because the prior art does not teach or
suggest the recitation therein include a first mounting structure is disposed on the outer
surface, the first accessory attachment hub is disposed over the first mounting structure, and both
the first accessory attachment hub and the first mounting structure are attached to the helmet by
the at least one fastener. Also, claim 37 is allowable because the prior art does not teach or
suggest the recitation therein including a spacer between the second accessory attachment hub
and the outer surface of the helmet, the spacer configured to accommodate a difference in surface
contour between a helmet interface surface of the second accessory attachment hub and the outer
surface of the helmet.
Claims 29-33 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 29 and 32 with its respective are allowable because the prior art does not teach or suggest the recitation therein including an accessory mount having an interface for attaching a second accessory device to the helmet system, wherein the accessory mount is attached to the outer surface of the helmet and the first accessory attachment hub covers at least a portion of the accessory mount and the first accessory attachment hub is disposed on a first side of the helmet, a second accessory attachment hub is disposed on a second side of the helmet shell, the second side opposing the first side, and
the first accessory device is attachable to the helmet system by attaching the first accessory to the
first accessory attachment hub and to the second accessory attachment hub, wherein the first
accessory device is disposed across a front portion of the helmet when attached to the helmet
system, respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the prior art references cited on PTO-892 discloses a helmet having a mounting receiver on an outer surface thereof that is configured to be attached to different accessory devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEJASH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am -5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at (571) 272-5559. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit:
https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more
information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about
filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC)
at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service
Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
September 26, 2026 /TAJASH D PATEL/ Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3732
